fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Lighting & Studio Techniques | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              5       6       end
  

Archive 2009 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion

  
 
Micky Bill
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #1 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


Paul Buff wrote:
Brent Ward wrote:



Jun 25, 2009 at 02:03 PM
Carlton Beener
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #2 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


Paul Buff wrote:
It's sort of like when seasoned studio musicians would come into my studio and try to do rock and roll songs.


Thats not really a fair analogy Paul. Some of the best musicians around today are in rock bands. Maybe if you'd like to compare instruments it would work better for you. I'm sure for every $2000 guitar sold there are 5 $200 guitars sold. Sure a Fender Squire will fill the needs of the majority but you should never discount the people who buy a Les Paul because they need something better and know how to use it.



Jun 25, 2009 at 02:22 PM
Paul Buff
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #3 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


Carlton Beener wrote:
Thats not really a fair analogy Paul. Some of the best musicians around today are in rock bands. Maybe if you'd like to compare instruments it would work better for you. I'm sure for every $2000 guitar sold there are 5 $200 guitars sold. Sure a Fender Squire will fill the needs of the majority but you should never discount the people who buy a Les Paul because they need something better and know how to use it.


Geez are we off topic. Ever hear a symphony orchestra try to play Wipe Out? Regarding $2000 guitars to $200 guitars, try more like 100 to 1.

The point was, do makers of $2000 guitars know how to compete with the $200 ones? Usually no more than vice versa.



Jun 25, 2009 at 03:22 PM
kenyee
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #4 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


shatterkiss wrote:
Moreover, I don't honestly think I've assisted on a real commercial shoot in the last 3-5 years where we used lights that the photographer owned.


An interesting question might be to ask these commercial photogs what they own for personal use (they can't always rent stuff to practice with?). I suspect a lot of the rental stuff is being able to bill a client for the gear and studio rental. If someone paid me for a big multi $K commercial/advertising shoot, I'd choose Profoto and those massive parabolics as well...and a bunch of helpers to haul the heavy gear around



Jun 25, 2009 at 09:35 PM
digitaled
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #5 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


Any word on the ABMax shipping date?
Is the first week of July still on track??

We are shooting everyday so i am ready for the Max for everyday use right away.



Jun 26, 2009 at 04:29 PM
Cableaddict
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #6 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


Paul Buff wrote:
Geez are we off topic. Ever hear a symphony orchestra try to play Wipe Out?


So true! Reminds me of those Frank Zappa videos.

Classical musicians scare me.



Jun 26, 2009 at 10:11 PM
shatterkiss
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #7 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


kenyee wrote:
An interesting question might be to ask these commercial photogs what they own for personal use (they can't always rent stuff to practice with?). I suspect a lot of the rental stuff is being able to bill a client for the gear and studio rental. If someone paid me for a big multi $K commercial/advertising shoot, I'd choose Profoto and those massive parabolics as well...and a bunch of helpers to haul the heavy gear around


I can only speak to the ones I know personally or have read some kind of specific information on. For the most part, the only ones to own a significant amount of lighting gear are the ones who either maintain a small personal studio (small enough for test shoots or portraiture, too small for most client work). They tend to own the same stuff they rent, just less of it: mostly Profoto, stuff like the Pro7B or lesser Acute2 line.

As for renting for practice shoots...I think some of you don't understand how easy it is to rent in a major market. I can make one 5-minute phone call and have a 3-head Profoto kit dropped on my doorstep a couple of hours later, probably cost me $75/day plus a delivery fee. If you aren't maintaining your own studio and client jobs pay for rental gear, what incentive is there to own more than a couple of heads?



Jun 27, 2009 at 08:37 AM
kenyee
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #8 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


shatterkiss wrote:
I can make one 5-minute phone call and have a 3-head Profoto kit dropped on my doorstep a couple of hours later, probably cost me $75/day plus a delivery fee.


Wow. That's nice service. At the rental houses in Boston, you have to pick things up but the lighting kits are a little more expensive (roughly $120/day for a similar kit).
I was all excited about renting a broncolor parabolic to play with for a day until I found out it was $200/day

I definitely agree there's no point in owning if the client absorbs the rental costs, and rental costs aren't high enough for clients to balk at the costs...
.




Jun 27, 2009 at 09:14 AM
shatterkiss
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #9 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


kenyee wrote:
I definitely agree there's no point in owning if the client absorbs the rental costs, and rental costs aren't high enough for clients to balk at the costs...


Go back and look at the photos and video in this thread:

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/786229

This is the kind of thing that some of us are referring to when we say "commercial photography"...the idea that it's done for a commercial client for a commercial application and the budget that follows. Gear rental costs don't raise an eyebrow until you start talking about renting cranes, 1,000-amp genny trucks, etc...partly because they're going to be dwarfed by the prop, labor and wardrobe expenses. A high-end makeup artist, with assistant, for a shoot on that scale could cost $1,500+/day. The retouching could have easily billed at $500/hour. Compared to labor fees like that, which aren't considered unreasonable, no one bats an eyelash at $500/day for production RVs or $2,500 for crafts services...or a $3,500 rental gear package.

And lest you say, "well, that's an atypical shoot"...I've done work on shoots for other brands like La Perla and Prada and Helmut Lang that followed the same kind of scope. Things like building entire apartment sets on soundstages rather than shooting a location because they need the apartment to be "just so".

For me, personally, this is why drawing the distinction between "professional photographer" and "commercial photographer" is so important - the gulf between the day-to-day reality and needs of the two can be enormous.

And before the finger-pointing starts again - I'm not a commercial photographer, much as I aspire to being one.



Jun 27, 2009 at 10:06 AM
shatterkiss
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #10 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


Micky Bill wrote:
Just like the top 10% is different from the other 90% of photo work that is produced, NY and LA are different from the rest of the country. Here in LA many photographers don't own anything, everything is rented. Until the early 90s lots of people owned studios but then the real estate spiked, I know 3 guys who lost their buildings to dot coms that eventually went bust. In Detroit however which used to do a huge amount of photography for the car industry, everybody had to own 2 of everything. And their own giant studio. Probably in
...Show more

I don't disagree that NY and LA (and I'd include Chicago) are different than the rest of the country, but I'd say that those three photographic markets produce 80% of the US's commercial photography. That's where the majority of the ad agencies are, with those agencies preferring to hire photographers who are local to them regardless of where the shoots take place. In the commercial world, the agencies service the clients, photographers and everyone else service the agencies, rental houses and suppliers service photographers...so everyone clusters. It's not that these cities are the barometer for the country, it's that these cities own the vast majority of the country's commercial work. When I pop into AdBase and run a geographic search on commercial art directors and buyers, I get 100x more hits in NYC or LA or Chicago than I do in Detroit, Minneapolis, Tulsa, Atlanta, Seattle, Salt Lake City. With 100x the potential clients, it reasons that you'd have just as large a disparity in photographers and the businesses that make money from and support photographers.

Detroit is a bad example, I think...yeah, JWT and Ogilvy and others had agency outposts there, but they only existed to service Ford and Chrysler and the like. I know: a creative shop I worked for years ago had an office in Royal Oak (which I staffed up) just to service our Ford business. Other than the autos, how much commercial photography business existed in Detroit? It makes sense that there isn't a support infrastructure there, given how few photographers and how limited the industry is there. Even Miami has a limited rental scene: a couple of rental houses, mostly that double as the only large studios in town (Splashlight, for instance). They have a limited commercial industry, traditionally the winter months of the fashion industry, so there's limited revenue potential for support businesses.

Again, this all changes if we stop talking solely about commercial photography and broaden the discussion to other areas of professional photography, like portrait studios or wedding photographers. But given that each business's needs are so different, practically the only thing they have in common is the word "photography".



Jun 27, 2009 at 10:25 AM
robin4est
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #11 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


First, props to Paul Buff for engaging some of the amateur businessmen on this forum.
Taking photographs, even large commercial jobs, is nothing like running a manufacturing business.
Suggestions, of course, but some of the commentary is just rude and argumentative. I'm not sure why Paul keeps coming back, but if they're talking about you, you must be doing something right. Maybe Paul's market is the little guy like me and a lot of my friends who own his lights, but have never made a penny from them.



Jun 27, 2009 at 11:08 AM
Paul Buff
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #12 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


robin4est wrote:
First, props to Paul Buff for engaging some of the amateur businessmen on this forum.
Taking photographs, even large commercial jobs, is nothing like running a manufacturing business.
Suggestions, of course, but some of the commentary is just rude and argumentative. I'm not sure why Paul keeps coming back, but if they're talking about you, you must be doing something right. Maybe Paul's market is the little guy like me and a lot of my friends who own his lights, but have never made a penny from them.

Thanks for the support. I've been doing this for a long time - 50 years in total in the recording studio business, pro audio manufacturing - yes, as pro as it gets, and studio lighting for 28 years. I pat my own back for never losing my balance and always remembering who brung me to the dance - the real people.

These forums get pretty ridiculous, with a lot of people talking about things they don't really know about. The fact is that small owner-operated studios are the backbone of the industry, whether amateur, small professional or top of the field. The people who frequent rental studios and are willing to rent (let their client rent) equipment have there place and I have nothing against them. But they are simply not my marketplace - they are less than 5% of the market.

I expect when they travel they stay at 5 star hotels, drive rented Mercedes and dine at the finest restaurants. Then the fall from the graces of their high flying clients (who aren't flying that high right now) and come back to earth.

In this vein, shouldn't we be discussing why Denny's doesn't compare with Woflgang Puck's and why the Hamton Inn should be discredited because it doesn't have the amenities offered by an Inn in the Hamptons, or why a Honda is junk compared to a Ferrari?

I've dealt with and served the Chet Atkins', Dick Clark's, Beatles, Zappas and . . . they all know who I am and what I do. And I've also dealt with and served 1000s of small studios that produced a fair percentage of the music you all listen to. A fair number of them came from my own $5000 studio and they sound just like the ones that came from $3,000,000 studios. In the photo industry, an equally fair number of the pictures and ads you see in the national magazines have also come from my customers.

It's a big world and there's room for everyone. There's on old saying : "It doesn't matter what they are saying as long as they are talking about you." So how many people are talking about all those posters here who spend their time knocking everyone but themselves? Talk is cheap on the internet, success in the real world is another matter.



Jun 27, 2009 at 12:24 PM
Gene L.
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #13 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


As an engineer and PT photographer, I hope you don't mind that I throw out my thoughts.

My best compromise solution, because design is always a compromise of competing requirements, is to pull the DC high voltage circuit out of the monolight body and offer it as part of a battery pack. Putting the battery on the stand is useful outdoors. If heavy enough it eliminates the need for a sand bag, which is always a good idea outdoors, thus killing three birds with one stone (size/weight, cost, and stability/utility).

The battery pack gets sold as an option, which helps reduce the price of the basic model, minimizes the monolight's size/weight, and allows lower cost when DC is not needed. Ideally the battery sits below the high voltage circuit and is detachable so a it can be swapped out for a spare battery quickly and easily. This is a good marketing move, as everyone should have a spare battery or two for those extended shoots. The downside I see to this arrangement is the HV cable. A standard coil cable will reach for typical use, but an optional longer cable (or extension) is needed for booms and odd installs. I guess that's yet another option.

Ideally, the battery is Lithium-Ion or better yet, Lithium-Polymer, but that gets expensive. If the market permits, it might be good to offer multiple battery chemistry to accommodate different needs. The charger should come with the battery and the charging connector should be keyed differently for each chemistry.

I have never heard of a useful DC modeling light, but with the advent of LED lighting, it might be possible. The trick is having something that works for AC and DC. LEDs may offer the solution, but of course at a cost of more electronics. On the bright side, the control for LED lighting will be low voltage and much lower power, so it would dissipate less heat.

And finally, a comment about this thread. It started with a sincere suggestion offered with the best of intent, as is my own post. I don't mind at all if someone can poke holes in my ideas, that's what engineering is all about. In the end, holes are patched and compromises made. However, reading through all the posts, I can see where this thread has run off into the ditch with some postings even bordering on personal insult. It's no wonder that a person might get a bit defensive after being subjected to this. Just an observation for whatever value it might be.

-Gene



Jun 27, 2009 at 01:36 PM
mmurph
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #14 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


The Dynalite Uni JR 400 has used a similar solution for a number of years.

It could use the high voltage directly out of a Quantum Turbo or Dynalite Jackrabbit battery via a cable. Both are relatively small units, almost pocket-sized in some cases. There are also 3rd party generic clones available. The Uni itself is a very compact, solidly built portable monolight that weighs under 3 pounds. Solid metal, built like a small bullet.

Dynalite offers a wide range of modifiers. The Uni is 320 Ws on DC, 400 Ws on AC. The only real limitation is the 3 stop adjustment range. I don't know why they haven't updated the unit in 10-15 years.

On the other end, the Broncolor Verso can use a 650 watt modelling light - a real modelling light for bright outdoor locations - with an 8 stop digital adjustment range over 3 channels for up to 3 heads. Either 1200 or 2400 Ws. It is a high-end studio pack built for location use.

It uses a larger battery to do that, but it is the type of pack you might haul when you have another 300+ pounds of equipment to haul anyway for a commercial shoot, as outlined above - large parabolic light modifiers, etc.

In beween are the 12 pound power packs with built in batteries and 50-100 watt modelling lights that are used for 10-20 seconds.

There are a range of solutions available, representing a variety of approaches to the engineering compromises mentioned. They seem to be evolving and getting better over the years.

The smaller Dynalite units used NiCad, then NiMH, etc.. The larger units still use SLA, which is most cost effective and easily replacable. Also easier to have multiple batteries available.

As usual, the more expensive high end units show the most innovation at first. AC inverters have been around in that market since 1988. It eventually "trickles down" to lower price points. Pretty similar to most other "consumer electronics" industries.



Jun 27, 2009 at 02:10 PM
Paul Buff
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #15 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


To my knowledge, Vagabond 1 was the first commercial pure sine inverter/battery on the market suitable for powering studio flash. Maybe some obscure pure sine system was available but I sure never saw it for sale in the US.

Also, the 1986 WL Ultra was the first monolight with remote control capability in the USA to my knowledge. Again, maybe some obscure uber expensive system offered remote control but I never saw it. Also, to this day I know of no system other than Buff lights that have fully voltage regulated modeling lamps.

As for monolights in general, the only monolights on the market in 1986 were the gigantic Bowens 800B (300WS I believe) at about $1200 US. BronColor peeps mentioned to me the Visatec lights were created to compete with White Lightning Ultra. They never succeeded in that goal to speak of. Many, if not most, modern monolights are based to a large degree on the WL Ultra.

In pro audio, my Allison Research computerized recording console system was the forerunner of all current such systems and was used widely globally by the top cutting edge artists of the 1970. Brag brag brag - I'm so humble I can't stand it. Google Paul C Buff some time. I just got 69 pages of hits.



Jun 27, 2009 at 06:10 PM
Brent Ward
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #16 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


Funny, when I google you I get this interesting info.

"Something you discover very quick when you work for Paul is that you are in competition with Paul. He is paying you to do a job that he will ultimately not allow you to accomplish, due to his incessant narcissistic behavior. If it has the slightest appearance of something better than what Paul can accomplish, then it will be forgotten or modified to the point that it is not really your creation after all. If your task is beyond Paul's capability, it will not prevent him in the least from attempting to orchestrate every aspect of your creativity.
Paul prides himself on his many long past accomplishments in the recording industry. Curiously though, he hasn't managed to save a single piece of tangible evidence to support his alleged 'historic contributions' to the art. He claims to have engineered several notorious '60s hitsincluding 'Wipeout' , 'Incense and Peppermint' , and 'Green-eyed Lady' , yet Paul has no wall adornments or collector's editions, autographs or photos to reflect any involvement in those projects. Most people would have kept some kind of memorabilia to commemorate such an achievement in life, if for no other reason than to substantiate their accomplishments, but apparently Paul didn't consider it very important. One has to wonder why not. When invited as a guest speaker at a recent AES meeting this past summer, he reiterated that he had no memorabilia to bring representative of his early recording achievements and that he would simply answer questions from the attendees.
Paul's next claim to notoriety was his friendship with famed musician Frank Zappa. To my knowledge, there are two books available and assorted internet listings about Zappa's early evolvement in the Southern California music scene, and indeed, Paul's name is mentioned in the context that he provided recording gear for one of Frank's early studio projects. Frank, did in fact buy Paul's five-track Pal Studio, which he then renamed, but that would seem to be the extent of Paul's involvement. There is really no way to tell.
No attempt will be made on this website to detail any of Paul's previous business ventures. It would seem senseless to kick that dead horse. All that will be said in that regard is that one of them involved infringing on a well-known audio company's patent to the extent that he was sued, lost and ended up paying royalties for each unit he sold. Within the studio equipment / professional audio industry at that time, this became common knowledge.
The company that Paul started in the mid-eighties, Paul C. Buff, Inc., manufactures photography flash equipment. Paul, granted, during a quest to assist his second wife, Llynn (he is on #6 now) in her profession as a photographer, discovered a niche market in which he did rush in to fill with a product line of relatively low-cost flash equipment. No attempt is made to disparage against Paul for that achievement, and he has been milking this cash cow every since for all he can get out of it. What IS at issue here is the manner in which he treats his employees and how his ego has managed to grow at an exponential rate over the years, to where he now regards himself as a living god. In Paul's presence, one is expected to show adoration and respect when he himself has not the capacity to respect anyone else's talents or opinions. Paul is NEVER wrong, but if he is, just don't make the mistake of pointing that out to him. That will be your Instant Karma. To insinuate such folly is tantamount to dismissal. Ex-employees have been fired and rehired, in some cases during the same day.


See the little guy in the box above? That describes most people that work for Paul Buff. It certainly describes my most recent experience with the company, which just ended the second week in October, 2007. Hi, I'm Chad. I worked for Paul from 1997 to 2001 as Chief Engineer and most-recently from April to October of this year (2007). I helped design the X-series photoflash units with Paul and later, I adapted the design and drafted the printed circuit boards for the Alien Bee series. There really is no difference at all between the two except the price and maybe the temperature/misfire beeper. I also designed (along with the Technical Director) the LG4X wired remote. I had nothing to do with the RR1 wireless remote system - and I am glad. It has never worked according to spec and the units in-house are on a revolving door status - sell them, give a refund, then sell them to someone else. It's no secret.

I designed and built all the production test jigs used for testing both series of products (WL & AB), which are still in regular use today. Using PIC microcontrollers, I also designed and built all the burn-in room timing equipment, again, still in use today.
In February 2007, I was solicited and enticed to walk away from a good job in another city at the suggestion that Paul 'had changed', had 'mellowed out' so to speak. OK, I'll bite. I did bite. After an hour on the phone with Paul and Debbie, it was decided that , quote "Well, It's sounds like full time employment is in order" and I should come back for an interview. So I did, and the rest they say is indeed history. The reasoning for this rehire was development of a 'new' digital photoflash unit, something I created for Paul when I worked for him previously in 2001 - but he wasn't interested. Now, after seeing Photogenics (now defunct) Solair flash unit with color corrected flash via truncating the flash power using heavy-duty semiconductors and microcontrollers, he decided that he wanted to be the "next one out in the market" with a totally new design. Not. Fact was, I was reverse-engineering the Photogenics as the basis for this new design. There wasn't going to be a lot of difference, oh maybe bells and whistles and a neat display, but that's about it. It wasn't a 'new' concept. But, I was expecting great things in the next couple of years, according to what transpired in that rehire meeting. Boy, was I in for a rude awakening. Paul's words, "We're not in a hurry to get this done. We want to make sure we've got it right before we release it." Too bad he didn't feel like this about the Vagabond II. More on that later.
If you're reading this then chances are you know a little about the industry and the presence that White-Lightning / Alien Bees has, which is substantial. You probably know that the Customer Service aspect of Paul's business is next to the best there is, but did you know that if it wasn't for Customer Service, Paul would have gone broke a long time ago? It's volume. If you saw the numbers regarding repairs and damage control for Paul's short-sided, profit-driven attitude, then maybe you wouldn't think so highly of the product, because eventually whatever you bought from Paul, chances are it is going to fail. Granted, the early 'can' lights and the Ultra series had problems in some areas, but were more bullet-proof than some of the later designs, even though there are still customers that swear by the Zap1000. Regardless, I am prepared to 'show and tell' you examples to substantiate my claim and I challenge Paul or anyone else to refute what is on this website. Bring it on."



Jun 27, 2009 at 10:21 PM
Gene L.
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #17 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


Paul Buff wrote:
...Brag brag brag - I'm so humble I can't stand it. Google Paul C Buff some time. I just got 69 pages of hits.


Paul, if I had half your success I would still be successful. Lap it up while you can, the dark angle awaits around the corner. And don't listen to the naysayers, they're all just jealous... hell, I'm jealous! How about passing some of that galactic knowledge my way so I can afford those new blasters when you get the wrinkles ironed out.

-Gene



Jun 27, 2009 at 10:47 PM
Paul Buff
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #18 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


Brent,

You must really be one sick and hostile (or jealous) puppy to pull this out of 69 Google pages that tell the real story. Chad is a psychologically disturbed person trying to get even for being fired twice. Maybe you should join his team of hardcore haters - now, including Brent Ward, he has 5 advocates. Chad's work at my company was primarily limited to drafting. Hardly anything he "designed" worked except in his mind.

Most everyone knows the real story - it's all on those 69 pages. Or call any of my employees and ask about the truth, or lack thereof, in the info you so gleefully rehashed. Stick and stones can break my bones . . . .



Jun 28, 2009 at 12:56 AM
Paul Buff
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #19 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


Gene L. wrote:
Paul, if I had half your success I would still be successful. Lap it up while you can, the dark angle awaits around the corner. And don't listen to the naysayers, they're all just jealous... hell, I'm jealous! How about passing some of that galactic knowledge my way so I can afford those new blasters when you get the wrinkles ironed out.

-Gene

Gene, thanks. I do try to pass on my knowledge constantly. Often when I do that on these forums it is greeted with petty stone throwing. My skin has become thick and I know my 500,000 supporter/customers from the handful of petty haters, and I know its not just me they hate. They hate anybody that succeeds unless they are sucking up to them. Hatred of success is a serious 21st century illness.



Jun 28, 2009 at 01:02 AM
Brent Ward
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #20 · Einstein Design Solution/Suggestion


Paul Buff wrote:
Brent,

You must really be one sick and hostile (or jealous) puppy to pull this out of 69 Google pages that tell the real story. Chad is a psychologically disturbed person trying to get even for being fired twice. Maybe you should join his team of hardcore haters - now, including Brent Ward, he has 5 advocates. Chad's work at my company was primarily limited to drafting. Hardly anything he "designed" worked except in his mind.

Most everyone knows the real story - it's all on those 69 pages. Or call any of my employees and ask about the truth, or
...Show more

It was at the top of the first page on my search, I don't care enough to search 69 pages just to mess with you. I have no idea if it's true or not, but your childish behavior that everyone has witnessed time and time again doesn't really make it that much of a "leap of faith" to believe.

I usually just ignore you, but combine your ego with me being in an ornery mood and I couldn't resist.



Jun 28, 2009 at 01:17 AM
1       2       3              5       6       end




FM Forums | Lighting & Studio Techniques | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              5       6       end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account